Spread near the goal line is riskier since the condensed field brings defenders closer to the QB. You need more blockers to account for this. Having the back there makes all the difference IMO.

It allows the defenders to play closer to the LOS, but the QB is still 7 or 8 yards back from the line, so the pass rushers don't start any closer. The reason lots of QBs like it near the goal line is it allows them to make multiple reads as quickly as possible. You can see the defense better and which of your four or five receivers is open. If you're dropping back from under center, it's a bit harder to see the defense and all four or five of your receivers before you need to let the ball go.

I have no problem with shotgun as a formation. Its the spread-empty that is kind of dumb now that the whole league has seen it for multiple years and can deal with it much better. Keep the back in there...! Simple as that. The dumbest of all is the formation where the full back trots out to split wide... Does anybody get this..?

The point of the empty formation is just to get five (rather than four) receivers into play right away. The goal is to be playing 5 on 7 rather than 4 on 7 at the snap. Bringing the fullback (or whoever the fifth player is) out there theoretically gives you two receivers who are single covered rather than just one, assuming a standard four-man pass rush. Normally, you aren't throwing to the fullback, but with the fullback flexed, you now potentially have two guys in single coverage to throw to rather than just one.

You drag a defender out there so essentially the strategy is to play 10 on 10...? How does this gain an advantage? do you ever throw to the fullback...? Explain this.

I think the Pats actually did hit Develin on the sideline in one game. I can't remember though if he was flexed out before the pass. I'll do some research and see if I can find it. UPDATE: He wasn't flexed. It started as an I formation with Develin then motioning from the I-formation FP position out to the TE position. He caught the pass along the sideline but starting from the right TE position.

Flexing out the back was highly effective with Kevin Faulk, who was a pretty good receiver from that spot.

Brady is 4 1/2 yards from the line at shotgun snap. that is good but he is still vulnerable to press coverage and a free rusher. 5 on 7 is better than 4 on 7 but it is still out numbered and a good defense can press and throw off the timing. If a safety blitzes and recievers are pressed you're in trouble.

Yes, empty set tells everyone in the stadium you are going to pass (unless, maybe, your QB is a Kaepernick type). Which is one reason even the Pats don't use it all the time. However, there's no doubt that the empty set creates problems for the defense because it is bound to leave a lot of guys just single covered. People think it allows the defense to just tee off on the QB, but blitzing against it can be very dangerous because someone is almost bound to be open at the snap, especially if the defense leaves a safety back, and there is great potential for significant YAC if the catch is made.

Not always. It depends on your receiver beating the defender covering him and Brady throwing into tight coverage under pressure. It is a good offense when teams back up and you can throw the ball into open zones.

AGain... when you are behind in the game. But a more effective offense when you are ahead will always maintain a run pass option with backs in the backfield.

Brady is 4 1/2 yards from the line at shotgun snap. that is good but he is still vulnerable to press coverage and a free rusher. 5 on 7 is better than 4 on 7 but it is still out numbered and a good defense can press and throw off the timing. If a safety blitzes and recievers are pressed you're in trouble.

Yes, you're right. I was thinking 7-step drop in my head . . . generally the QB gets at least as far back in the shotgun as he would in a 7-step drop. He just gets that far back right away.

There's no doubt the empty set is vulnerable to a blitz. At the same time, blitzing takes guys out of coverage and makes a quick throw more likely to succeed. The defense probably needs to leave at least one safety back, because if you don't and a completion is made, the receiver can go all the way to the endzone. So if there's a blitz, the receivers are typically covered five on five and Brady is very good at finding an open guy fast in that situation. Remember, if you send five rushers, there are still five OLs who should be able to at least prevent a direct rush to the QB. If you send six rushers, you may get to the QB unabated, but then you have no safety help and a completion can go for a TD, so it's a high-risk defensive strategy.

Yes, empty set tells everyone in the stadium you are going to pass (unless, maybe, your QB is a Kaepernick type). Which is one reason even the Pats don't use it all the time. However, there's no doubt that the empty set creates problems for the defense because it is bound to leave a lot of guys just single covered. People think it allows the defense to just tee off on the QB, but blitzing against it can be very dangerous because someone is almost bound to be open at the snap, especially if the defense leaves a safety back, and there is great potential for significant YAC if the catch is made.

Not always. It depends on your receiver beating the defender covering him and Brady throwing into tight coverage under pressure. It is a good offense when teams back up and you can throw the ball into open zones.

AGain... when you are behind in the game. But a more effective offense when you are ahead will always maintain a run pass option with backs in the backfield.

Of course, most guys are somewhat open when single covered, because a single defender can only cover 180 degrees around the receiver (that's why defenses want to bracket receivers with two defenders). The defender in single coverage has to be right on the receiver to make the hit immediately to knock the ball out. The risk here is that if the defender misses, the receiver has a long, long way to run. Man-to-man coverage in general is higher risk if a reception is made.

Spread near the goal line is riskier since the condensed field brings defenders closer to the QB. You need more blockers to account for this. Having the back there makes all the difference IMO.

It allows the defenders to play closer to the LOS, but the QB is still 7 or 8 yards back from the line, so the pass rushers don't start any closer. The reason lots of QBs like it near the goal line is it allows them to make multiple reads as quickly as possible. You can see the defense better and which of your four or five receivers is open. If you're dropping back from under center, it's a bit harder to see the defense and all four or five of your receivers before you need to let the ball go.

I have no problem with shotgun as a formation. Its the spread-empty that is kind of dumb now that the whole league has seen it for multiple years and can deal with it much better. Keep the back in there...! Simple as that. The dumbest of all is the formation where the full back trots out to split wide... Does anybody get this..?

The point of the empty formation is just to get five (rather than four) receivers into play right away. The goal is to be playing 5 on 7 rather than 4 on 7 at the snap. Bringing the fullback (or whoever the fifth player is) out there theoretically gives you two receivers who are single covered rather than just one, assuming a standard four-man pass rush. Normally, you aren't throwing to the fullback, but with the fullback flexed, you now potentially have two guys in single coverage to throw to rather than just one.

You drag a defender out there so essentially the strategy is to play 10 on 10...? How does this gain an advantage? do you ever throw to the fullback...? Explain this.

I think the Pats actually did hit Develin on the sideline in one game. I can't remember though if he was flexed out before the pass. I'll do some research and see if I can find it. UPDATE: He wasn't flexed. It started as an I formation with Develin then motioning from the I-formation FP position out to the TE position. He caught the pass along the sideline but starting from the right TE position.

Flexing out the back was highly effective with Kevin Faulk, who was a pretty good receiver from that spot.

Brady is 4 1/2 yards from the line at shotgun snap. that is good but he is still vulnerable to press coverage and a free rusher. 5 on 7 is better than 4 on 7 but it is still out numbered and a good defense can press and throw off the timing. If a safety blitzes and recievers are pressed you're in trouble.

Compounding this is Brady's lack of mobility. A Russell wilson can jog bck or to the oposite side when he sees a safeft coming thereby buying time. Brady can't do this . so the pressure on HIM gets ratched up times ten. This is why this offense has failed to make the transition from regular season to huge playoff games and Super Bowls.

Brady is 4 1/2 yards from the line at shotgun snap. that is good but he is still vulnerable to press coverage and a free rusher. 5 on 7 is better than 4 on 7 but it is still out numbered and a good defense can press and throw off the timing. If a safety blitzes and recievers are pressed you're in trouble.

Compounding this is Brady's lack of mobility. A Russell wilson can jog bck or to the oposite side when he sees a safeft coming thereby buying time. Brady can't do this . so the pressure on HIM gets ratched up times ten. This is why this offense has failed to make the transition from regular season to huge playoff games and Super Bowls.

Brady has always moved well in the pocket, but I do agree that lack of mobility is an issue for him. He isn't great scrambling or making throws on the run. Still, I don't buy that the game changes quite as much as people claim in the playoffs. I do think you play better teams and the game planning and preparation is maybe elevated a bit, but it's high all year long in the pros, at least for the best teams. I think the Pats' offensive problems are more related to talent and match ups, especially when key guys like Gronk are hurt.

I have no problem with the empty backfield spread per se. I've seen the Pats torch teams repeatedly in the past with it especially with the talent they had in 2011 and 2012. I'm not a fan of it near the goal line. I think the Pats best bet up close without Gronk is running it in. I am certainly not suggesting 3 straight runs and if you see a matchup advantage by all means switch the play to a pass. I think McDaniels is doing a fine job though i disagree with individual plays here and there. When has any OC made calls that people agree with. I think Weis was good but without Brady he has not been overly impressive (just like McDaniels).

As good as there offense was last year they almost never had Gronk and Hernandez healthy at the same time. Imagine how they would have been if they actually could have played with a full deck.

Another interesting use of the empty set, here, from the Panthers game--on a third and two. This is the kind of play that drives fans nuts, but it works quite well.

In this one, we start with Vereen in the back field

Then Brady sends Vereen out wide. Note the deep safety dropping back as they go to five wide. He's worried about someone beating the press and running free down the field. Note as well that the LB and corner switch spots, so the LB is on Vereen and the corner is on Dobson.

See the defense adjust, with safety now way back (and out of the play, which only needs three yards), and most of the defenders coming up to press. The LB on Vereen, however, stays back a bit, probably because press coverage is not a strength for him.

Now Brady motions Vereen to come closer to the line. Brady is setting up Vereen to beat the press here.

At the snap, Vereen is able to stack behind Dobson.

This allows Vereen to get open underneath the coverage for an easy completion and first down.

Great play calling here against a defense that is good against the run in short yardage situations.

Nice break down of that play pro. I hated it when they would send benny or even ridley out there as they never, ever threw them the ball. The other team knew it too. Obviously vareen is a better option.

Nice break down of that play pro. I hated it when they would send benny or even ridley out there as they never, ever threw them the ball. The other team knew it too. Obviously vareen is a better option.

Thanks.

The reason they send a guy out there who can't catch is just to take one defender out of the play. It's much more dangerous when the guy you flex out is also a receiving threat, but even taking one defender out of the play can be advantageous, because it means more of the remaining four receivers are single covered. With typical 7 men in coverage, flexing the fifth guy out leaves you with 7 defenders on 5 men rather than 7 defenders on 4 men. In the five-wide look, two or three receivers are likely to be single covered, while in the 4-wide look only one or maybe two are likely to be single covered. That's why they do that flex out even with guys who aren't great receivers. However, the play becomes much more formidable to defend against when the flexed guy is a dangerous receiver like Vereen (or, in the old days, Faulk).

Also, one reason to leave a guy like Benny or Ridley in even though he's not a great receiver is because having that runner in may make the defense leave run defenders in the game. That can create lots of problems for them if you then go spread and force them to defend the pass in space.

One more play before bed. A lot of fans who hate spread and shotgun, love play action with Brady under center. I like play action too, but one thing I've noticed this year is that a surprising number of Brady's sacks actually come on play action passes. Here's an example from the Browns game:

Do they pull too much on play action? Sometimes I wonder if all that pulling is really helping them. Mankins maybe would have been better used here helping Solder out.

Another interesting use of the empty set, here, from the Panthers game--on a third and two. This is the kind of play that drives fans nuts, but it works quite well.

In this one, we start with Vereen in the back field

Then Brady sends Vereen out wide. Note the deep safety dropping back as they go to five wide. He's worried about someone beating the press and running free down the field. Note as well that the LB and corner switch spots, so the LB is on Vereen and the corner is on Dobson.

See the defense adjust, with safety now way back (and out of the play, which only needs three yards), and most of the defenders coming up to press. The LB on Vereen, however, stays back a bit, probably because press coverage is not a strength for him.

Now Brady motions Vereen to come closer to the line. Brady is setting up Vereen to beat the press here.

At the snap, Vereen is able to stack behind Dobson.

This allows Vereen to get open underneath the coverage for an easy completion and first down.

Great play calling here against a defense that is good against the run in short yardage situations.

Again... and I'm trying to move on to the next point ... Which is the play calling once the Patriots had established the 14 point lead. Please comment on this because it is really the biggest part of the overall criticism. Your points about the spread offense are all valid but my point is that all playcalling is situational.

Do you want to go spread empty (abandonig the run) with a 2 score lead ...?

First of all , thanks for posting this since it really is the only way to view the sequence of playcalling . It also allows for recalling the situations in the game where you scream at the TV... lol.

So I've highlighted in bold and enlarged the terrible or questionable plays for discussion.

It didn't take long for 1st example... 2nd play from scrimmage... Before the play I screamed play action...! For 3 reasons. 1. You just had an effective run. 2 . run a possession type pass play to get your QB into a rythym. 3 . MIX the plays. INstead . fail . predictable run stuff. forcing pressured 3rd down. punt.

Next series was a good mix of plays . helped by a penalty in the end zone.

Following that, the next series, the same situation arose 2nd an 3. Same result as above. This time however Brady bailed out the bad call with a great throw to amendola on 3rd down under pressure.

the following series you have a good pass , a good run, then the obligatory habitual follow up run stuffed. Then we are graced with the first screen pass of the game except it is on the wrong down , gains 12 where it needed 14.

All is not lost however since Ghost got the FG. and we're now up 3 scores.

Now the moment of the game has arrived to burn clock and move chains. THis is also the time when you consider risk vs reward in your playcalling.

Mindlessly throwing the ball with no run option (empty backfield) is dumb and foolish since you are one dimensional. The defense knows you have to pass. you are doing them a favor. This is the same approach that lost Super bowls. It has a place when you are behind in a game . Up 3 scores it is assinine since you risk a hot rusher on Brady and the possibily of an interception or fumble by a receiver. (which is what happened.)

What followed was the weird refereeing portion of the game where all those penalties were being called on every play . Is it possible that the officials were also perplexed at this somewhat arrogant choice of offense at this point in the game...? It reminded them of the 18-0 season and run up scores and all that ball of hate. Natural reaction was to call every penalty in the book at the offending team.

3rd qtr... 3 (passes) and out ... Bad

then a mixed drive and another FG... Good

then a shotgun sack on 3rd and 2. who likes that call ...? Have some balls and hand it off when you're up 20-0 thanks to your defense.

4th qtr...

3 consecutive play action passes... The third going deep when a more sensible call would have been something short and possession -type. It was another repeat-type linear thinking call. MIX IT UP. Again the ill fated call kills the momentum of the drive and a punt soon follows.

4th punt out of the last 5 possessions occurs after shotgun offense fails again.

last drive ... run it . It's fun for everybody . Especially Tom Brady who gets to hand it off and not take stupid hits when leading by 3 scores.

Please address the basic criticism of coming out spread empty on !st down with a 3 score lead, as stated above.

Honestly, I have no problem with this one. It was a good call and would have worked (Bolden beat his man) if Ngata hadn't gotten his hand up to tip the pass. That's a good defensive play and a rare one. But the play itself was a good one. Brady was under no pressure and the receivers were open.

It's also the kind of call that keeps defensive coordinators guessing about what player packages they should put in on first down.

Coolade, the next play you don't like is this one. I presume you don't like the empty backfield? It does get 19 yards on 2nd and 8 though. It's also a great example of how the empty backfield gives you open receivers, especially when the defense sends a fifth rusher.